For fifteen years they have tried to shut down debate on the AGW hypothesis by claiming there is a consensus among scientists that it has been proven.
The term itself reveals that we aren't dealing with science, here. "Consensus" is a political term, not a science term. And all along, the AGW alarmist movement has been political to its core.
But even their claim to a phony consensus is falling apart at its seams. Read this CBSNews blog report about the schism happening right now at the American Physical Society. Back in 2007, the APS released its position statement on global warming, and it predictably followed the alarmist coda, calling for immediate reductions in CO2 emissions to avert disaster.
An APS member and Princeton physicist William Happer, along with other APS members have pressured the APS to review the position statement, especially now in light of the revelations of ClimateGate.
Sure, said the APS. We will review the position statement. But not for content, only for "clarity and tone," and we will appoint a special subcommittee to do the review.
Their chosen head of the subcommittee: Princeton physicist Robert Socolow, who is a long time AGW partisan, and who heads a research institute whose sole source of funding is global warming research dollars to the tune of $20 million. Having Socolow chairing the review committee appears as if it violates the APS' own ethics policy that tries to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest.
Happer and other APS members are very concerned over this obvious conflict of interest. They have redoubled their effort to get a thorough substantive review of the APS position, and now say they have 77 supporter in their efforts - members of the National Academies, fellows of major scientific societies, and one Nobel Laureate.
Meanwhile, 141 scientists have signed a statement at CopenhagenClimateChallenge.org that says actual evidence of human-caused global warming is lacking and "unproven computer models of climate are not acceptable substitutes for real world data obtained through unbiased and rigorous scientific investigation."
It is significant, in my opinion, that this was reported in a very forthright and complete manner on a CBSNews blog. For years there have been scientists signing petitions and statements objecting to the AGW choo choo train, but the mainstream media has dismissed them.
Maybe now the pressure is too great. Are they finally reporting the truth?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Kremer: Meanwhile, 141 scientists have signed a statement at CopenhagenClimateChallenge.org that says actual evidence of human-caused global warming is lacking and "unproven computer models of climate are not acceptable substitutes for real world data obtained through unbiased and rigorous scientific investigation."
JK: Your statement is supported by emails from the head of the CRU and from an author of 4 chapters of the UN’s climate change reports (IPCC reports):
Phil Jones - head of the Climate Research Unit, Draft Contributing Author to the Summary for Policy Makers, and Coordinating Lead Author of Ch3 of the 4th UN IPCC report on climate change, AR4) said:
Jul 5 15:51:55 2005: The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has but it is only 7 years of data and it isn't statistically significant. (1120593115.txt) [ Note: in 2009, it is now11 years of cooling.]
Here is what Kevin Trenberth, Draft Contributing Author for the Summary for Policy Makers, contributing author to Ch 1, a lead author for Ch 3, and contributing author to Ch 7 of the 4th UN IPCC report on climate change, AR4.) Said:
12 Oct 2009: ... we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on record. (...) and it smashed the previous records for these days by 10F. (...) The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't. (. . .) Our observing system is inadequate. (1255352257.txt)
-------------------------------
Oct 14, 2009: We are not close to balancing the energy budget. The fact that we can not account for what is happening in the climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not! It is a travesty! (1255523796.txt)
Why are these clowns even meeting in Copenhagen when the key advocates are admitting that the earth hasn’t warmed in 11 years, they don’t know why and they don’t have adequate observing systems.
The warmers are fools following the fools, idiots and liars at the CRU/UN. Kremer figured this out 10 years ago, why didn’t these clowns?
(BTW, we are still waiting for the apologies from the deluded warmers for all their insults.)
Thanks
JK
I am re-watching this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WWpH0lmcxA
The problem with Tinker Toys is,that after a while one grows up and moves on. It's ironic that so much time and effort is being expended at this time to jam through global solutions based upon a model that simply doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Man-made global warming simply isn't interesting anymore. It was a fad and will die as fads do.
Not with a bang.
.
Scientific theories are all falsifiable. They are meant to be tested by new variables ad infinitum.
Relativity is a theory even though it can’t predict gravitational effects on the subatomic level. The inverse is true with quantum mechanics. The big bang is and always will be a theory since we did not exist at the time to verify it.
Relativity – a theory - Albert Einstein
Quantum mechanics - a theory - Max Planck
Big bang – a theory - Georges Lemaître
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
Global warming – the science is settled - Albert Gore
Capitalism vs. socialism – the debate is over - Howard Dean
Post a Comment